SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA—The Apple v. Samsung trial started getting into technical details today, with afternoon testimony from Peter Bressler. Bressler is an industrial designer who is Apple's first expert witness and, unsurprisingly, he testified that Apple's trade dress and four design patents are infringed by Samsung smartphones and the Galaxy Tab 10.1.

But during a lengthy cross-examination, Samsung lawyer Charles Verhoeven focused on small differences between Apple's design patents and the accused Samsung phones.

"It is wider, yes," said Bressler, when asked about the side margin of the Samsung Infuse 4G (and yes, the phone's margins are wider than the margins described in Apple's D677 patent). "Again, this is a level of detail that the ordinary observer wouldn't see."

"Would you agree that they are they substantially different?" asked Verhoeven. "If the width is measured and it turns out to be a factor of 15 times wider, you think that's just a minor detail?"

Verhoeven brought out more differences through his questioning: the Infuse has four buttons at the bottom rather than the iPhone's iconic single button; it has no bezel, as the iPhone has.

It wasn't until the end of the day that Verhoeven made sure the jury knew that Bressler's testimony is paid for by Apple—to the tune of $400 per hour.

"How much has Apple paid you so far?" asked Verhoeven.

"In this case, about $75,000," said Bressler.

Lawyers for the two electronics giants also feuded bitterly over what exhibits and demonstrative slides could be shown to the jury. US District Judge Lucy Koh, who is overseeing the case, clearly grew frustrated with lawyers on both sides. She has begun docking time from each side for the endless arguments over visual displays.

Testimony will continue Tuesday and Friday this week, and throughout the following week. Apple is slated to bring several different expert witnesses to the stand. Those experts include Russell Winer, a professor of marketing at NYU; and Ravin Balakrishnan, a computer scientist at the University of Toronto.

One notable non-expert who will soon be called to the stand: Susan Kare. She's a former Apple designer who created some of the earliest Macintosh graphics and icons.

It could be the way it's being reported but it seems like Samsung isn't going very well with this.

I don't see that. I see Samsung lawyer carefully making the expert witness to state the difference between the devices and then establish his bias towards Apple. I wouldn't say it's some kind of masterstroke but it certainly doesn't look like Samsung did anything that would disadvantage them.

Ars needs a feed that excludes boring patent litigation. I'm sick of seeing 2 posts a day about this. And what's with the editorializing in the headline?

Because CondeNast sent out an Ars enforcer who pointed a gun at your head and told you to read the headline and click the link, read the article, then post in the comments section or sleep with the fishes?

Does that sound any more ridiculous than the people who seem to be incapable of ignoring articles in which they have no interest?

I'm so sick of patents! I don't even care who is right or wrong in this case.... you're both wrong. Software patents, design patents, industrial patents... If it in any way obvious.. it should not be patentable!

It's a good strategy for Samsung because it is very difficult for the eye to not notice a small detail once it has been pointed out. The case will basically rest on whether or not the jury can tell the difference between the Samsung phones and the iPhone and the Samsung lawyers are essentially teaching the jury how to do it easily. By the time deliberations happen, the jury will be experts in differentiating iPhones and Samsung phones.

I'm sorry... It' like comparing peanut butter to turkey? So what, the phones are completely different or did I get this wrong.

Either case, this suit is just ridiculous.

I would have had such a field day with that comment.

So which is the peanut butter? Which is the turkey? You're trying to say these phones are as different as PB is to turkey? If so how can one infringe on design of the other? Lawyer should have jumped in for the kill to discredit this witness. For crying out loud, he just practically won the case for samsung... lol.

Ars needs a feed that excludes boring patent litigation. I'm sick of seeing 2 posts a day about this. And what's with the editorializing in the headline?

I was tired of two or three posts per day of nothingness in the lead-up to the trial. The actual trial though? I'm interested in the goings on of because of what the outcome could mean for the industry. We just got fed so much first-course crap that our palettes were shot when the main course came out.

Going by the upcoming witnesses for Apple, and the way they presented themselves in their opening statements (one of the Ars writers noted how they had slick presentations?), it just seems like they're using all of their marketing energy for this lawsuit, instead of selling their products. It's a reflection that they have nothing better to do, and are running out of ideas.

In other words, they're running out of ideas, and have nothing better to do, and that's why they're going through with this lawsuit. It's all just an excuse for their lack of productivity.

Going by the upcoming witnesses for Apple, and the way they presented themselves in their opening statements (one of the Ars writers noted how they had slick presentations?), it just seems like they're using all of their marketing energy for this lawsuit, instead of selling their products.

Believe it or not, Apple is big enough company that they can assign a team of lawyers and witness to the legal department and still have just enough money left over to hire some more people for their martketing department.

I'm not sure, but the $400/hr is probably just his rate while testifying. His regular rate to prepare the analysis was probably less. And the $75k could easily be how much his company earned, not just himself. All very normal.

On the one hand it always bothers me how lawyers complain that experts are paid for their testimony. The alternative is that experts have to take unpaid time away from their jobs to testify - you'd have a hard time getting experts to testify at all if that were the case.

On the other hand - $400 an hour? To look at how wide the margins on an iPad are? I'd like to know how they justify that.

Samsung and every other Asian company should be able to copy everything, the package, the connection, the icons, the colors, the exterior etc... all for free as usual, hmm... The Google way appears to be 'what's yours is mine and what's mine is mine' or is that the Geek Way. It appears to be the Geek Way.

Samsung and every other Asian company should be able to copy everything, the package, the connection, the icons, the colors, the exterior etc... all for free as usual, hmm... The Google way appears to be 'what's yours is mine and what's mine is mine' or is that the Geek Way. It appears to be the Geek Way.

On the one hand it always bothers me how lawyers complain that experts are paid for their testimony. The alternative is that experts have to take unpaid time away from their jobs to testify - you'd have a hard time getting experts to testify at all if that were the case.

On the other hand - $400 an hour? To look at how wide the margins on an iPad are? I'd like to know how they justify that.

100m iPhones sold in 10 months at $622 each on average.

1m every 3 days, 322k every 24 hours, or 224 a minute justifies his time-value.